Allowed

Ayisha Kunhammed v. E.K.Soman

Kerala HC16 Sept 2021MFA/468/2001

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed an appeal against a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal award. The Court held the original notional income was inadequate and increased the dependency compensation. It also increased the loss of consortium award, directing total additional compensation of Rs. 3,74,000 with interest.

What did the court decide?

Additional compensation of Rs. 3,74,000 awarded with interest at 9% per annum from the date of petition.

Ayisha Kunhammed Vs E.K.Soman — Motor Accident Claims | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 16^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 25TH BHADRA, 1943

¶5

MFA NO. 468 OF 2001

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN OPMV 462/1995 OF MOTOR ACCIDENT CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, THALASSERY, KANNUR

¶7

APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:

¶8

1 AYISHA KUNHAMMED,W/O LATE KUNHAMMED HAJEE, AGED 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT AYISHA NIVAS, ERAMALA AMSOM, DESOM, P.O.ORKKATTERI, PIN 673 501, VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

¶9

2 K.NAFEESA KUHAMMED, W/O LATE KUNHAMMED HAJEE, AGED 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT PERUNTHODY HOUSE, CHODIKKOTTA, P.O. MAHE, PIN 673 310

¶10

3 SON, NAHEEM, S/O LATE KUNHAMMED HAJI, (MINOR), AGED 14 YEARS, RESIDING AT PERUNTHODY HOUSE, CHODIKKOTTA, P.O. MAHE, PIN 673 310

¶11

4 BROTHER NAJEEB, S/O LATE KUNHAMMED HAJEE (MINOR), AGED 9 YEARS, RESIDING AT PERUNTHODY HOUSE, CHODIKKOTTA, P.O. MAHE, PIN 673 310 5 SISTER NASEEBA, D/O LATE KUNHAMMED HAJI, (MINOR), AGED 9 YEARS, RESIDING AT PERUNTHODY HOUSE, CHODIKKOTTA, P.O. MAHE, PIN 673 310

¶12

6 SISTER NAHIDA, D/O LATE KUNHAMMED HAJI, (MINOR), AGED 6 1/2 YEARS, RESIDING AT PERUNTHODY HOUSE, CHODIKKOTTA, P.O. MAHE, PIN 673 310 ( MINOR PETITIONERS 3 TO 6 BY MOTHER AND NEXT FRIEND 2ND PETITIONER) BY ADVS. SRI.B.KRISHNAN SRI.R.PARTHASARATHY

¶13

RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

¶14

1 E.K.SOMAN, S/O KUNHIKUTTAN, AGED 47 YEARS, RESIDING AT EDAPARAMBIL HOUSE, P.O. PERAVOOR, PIN 670 673, TELLICHERRY TALUK, (OWNER OF BUS KL.13 A/5775)

¶15

2 P.K.JAMES ALIAS THANKACHAN, S/O KURUVILA, AGED 31 YEARS, RESIDING AT PATTASSERY HOUSE, ARALAM AMSOM, KEEZHPPALLY DESOM, P.O. PAYAM, PIN 670 704, TELLICHEERY TALUK (DRIVER OF BUS KL 13A/5775)

¶16

MFA No.468/2001

¶17

¶18

3 THE UNITED INDIA INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, 2/8 FORT ROAD, POST BOX NO.52, KANNUR, PIN 670 001 ( INSURER OF BUS KL 13 - A/5775)

¶19

BY ADV SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL

¶20

THIS MISC. FIRST APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

MFA No.468/2001

JUDGMENT

One Kunhammed Hajee met with a motor vehicle accident

¶25

on 28.9.1994 and succumbed to the injuries. To his legal heirs, viz, two wives and four minor children, the Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.2,02,600/- as against the claim of Rs.25 lakhs, which is under

¶26

challenge. Firstly, on the ground that the notional income applied is only at Rs.1,500/- overlooking the actual income of the victim and secondly on the reason that the compensation awarded under the head of loss of

¶27

consortium does not reflect the proper application of law.

¶28

Exts.A4 and A9, two passports belonged to the deceased would abundantly make it clear that there were frequent visits to Dubai. It would lend support to the case advanced by the petitioners that he was doing business in Dubai. In order to show the actual business conducted or the income derived therefrom, no other document except Ext.A6 copy of bank account passbook was

¶29

produced, which starts from 14.3.1991 to 1.8.1995. Based on it, it was submitted that the entries would show that

¶30

MFA No.468/2001 4

¶31

he was having an average monthly deposit of Rs.50,000/-

¶32

in the said account. On a mere perusal of the said document would show that deposits were made for a few days and there are very big gap in between various deposits exceeding 3 to 6 months. Hence, the same cannot

¶33

be taken as a document showing the income of the deceased. But as discussed earlier, his frequent visits to Dubai through air and the expenditure thereof would

¶34

clearly show that the notional income assessed at Rs.1,500/- per month is grossly inadequate to meet the situation. The Tribunal ought to have assessed the monthly income of the deceased at least @ Rs.4,500/- per

¶35

month by applying the rationale settled in Sarla Verma

¶36

v. Delhi Transport Corporation (2010 (2) KLT 802) and National Insurance Company Limited v. Pranay Sethi and Others [( 2017) 16 SCC 680] . Hence, the compensation under the head of loss of dependency would come to Rs. 5,04,000/- ( 4500 x 12 x 14 x 2/3). The appellants would get an additional compensation of Rs.3,24,000/-.

¶37

An amount of Rs.10,000/- alone was granted under the head of loss of consortium jointly to the petitioners

¶38

though they are separately entitled to loss of consortium

¶39

MFA No.468/2001 5

¶40

at the said rate. Hence, an amount of Rs.60,000/- is

¶41

awarded under the head of loss of consortium.

¶42

Hence, the appellants are entitled to an additional compensation of Rs.3,74,000/-, besides the amount of Rs.2,02,600/- awarded by the Tribunal. It will carry interest @ 9% per annum from the date of petition till the date of realization.

¶43

The appeal is allowed accordingly.

¶44

Sd/-

¶45

P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE

¶46

Ayisha Kunhammed v. E.K.Soman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ayisha Kunhammed v. E.K.Soman

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

V.O.Jacob Vs Jose

Thomas Vs Amal

General Manager Southern Railways, Vs Chandran

Ammini Kuruvila, Vs Kunjumol Charly

Kannoth Biyyathu Vs Nhenol Kunhi Avulla Haji

Baby Vs Sreedevi